Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Contests Home


Previous Contests

What Is “Fundamental”
October 28, 2017 to January 22, 2018
Sponsored by the Fetzer Franklin Fund and The Peter & Patricia Gruber Foundation
read/discusswinners

Wandering Towards a Goal
How can mindless mathematical laws give rise to aims and intention?
December 2, 2016 to March 3, 2017
Contest Partner: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Fund.
read/discusswinners

Trick or Truth: The Mysterious Connection Between Physics and Mathematics
Contest Partners: Nanotronics Imaging, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, and The John Templeton Foundation
Media Partner: Scientific American

read/discusswinners

How Should Humanity Steer the Future?
January 9, 2014 - August 31, 2014
Contest Partners: Jaan Tallinn, The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, The John Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

It From Bit or Bit From It
March 25 - June 28, 2013
Contest Partners: The Gruber Foundation, J. Templeton Foundation, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Questioning the Foundations
Which of Our Basic Physical Assumptions Are Wrong?
May 24 - August 31, 2012
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation, SubMeta, and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

Is Reality Digital or Analog?
November 2010 - February 2011
Contest Partners: The Peter and Patricia Gruber Foundation and Scientific American
read/discusswinners

What's Ultimately Possible in Physics?
May - October 2009
Contest Partners: Astrid and Bruce McWilliams
read/discusswinners

The Nature of Time
August - December 2008
read/discusswinners

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Paul Borrill: on 8/7/13 at 19:10pm UTC, wrote Dear David, I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest...

eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/7/13 at 10:22am UTC, wrote Hi David, No contradiction between eDuality and information. eDuality is...

Cristinel Stoica: on 8/7/13 at 7:43am UTC, wrote Hi, votes are vanishing again.

David Levan: on 8/6/13 at 14:09pm UTC, wrote Hi Amazing H. I don't believe, I don't believe in duality, root of...

eAmazigh HANNOU: on 8/6/13 at 1:36am UTC, wrote Dear David, We are at the end of this essay contest. In conclusion, at...

Sreenath N: on 8/2/13 at 15:27pm UTC, wrote Dear David, You have written your essay in original style and accordingly...

john selye: on 8/2/13 at 1:48am UTC, wrote Having read so many insightful essays, I am probably not the only one to...

Joe Fisher: on 7/29/13 at 15:42pm UTC, wrote David, I wish to withdraw my previous comment for it was uncalled for and...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Hanvi jobs: "Yes i am totally agreed with this article and i just want say that this..." in Can Time Be Saved From...

Robert McEachern: ""all experiments have pointed towards this and there is no way to avoid..." in Review of "Foundations of...

James Putnam: "Light bends because it is accelerating. It accelerates toward an object..." in Black Hole Photographed...

Robert McEachern: "Lorenzo, The nature of "information" is well understood outside of..." in Review of "Foundations of...

Georgina Woodward: "Steve, Lorraine is writing about a simpler "knowing " rather than the..." in The Nature of Time

Steve Agnew: "Knowing information necessarily means neural action potentials. Atom and..." in The Nature of Time


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.

Dissolving Quantum Paradoxes
The impossibility of building a perfect clock could help explain away microscale weirdness.


FQXi FORUM
May 22, 2019

CATEGORY: It From Bit or Bit From It? Essay Contest (2013) [back]
TOPIC: What is it and a bit by David Levan [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Author David Levan wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 12:39 GMT
Essay Abstract

IT in a double magnitude, as a material reality component or a hidden all inclusive answer to our questions in the interaction with BITs. BITs as discernible difference from equality. BITs as information which origin is not restricted to common tangible domain. Hidden information from momentum space topology represent the root knowledge for our universe space-time. The conversion or metamorphosis of this edge physical BITs to common physical ITs proceed by spontaneous symmetry break or coherent information emergence. Top-down causation assemble the invisible links, which complete the miraculous origins of order.

Author Bio

private, graduate physics, interests : quantum physics, philosophy, astrophysics, biophysics.

Download Essay PDF File

Bookmark and Share



James Lee Hoover wrote on Jul. 3, 2013 @ 20:14 GMT
David,

If given the time and the wits to evaluate over 120 more entries, I have a month to try. My seemingly whimsical title, “It’s good to be the king,” is serious about our subject.

Jim

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Satyavarapu Naga Parameswara Gupta wrote on Jul. 4, 2013 @ 14:20 GMT
Dear David,

Thank you for nice paper. Your concept"IT in a double magnitude, as a material reality component or a hidden all inclusive answer to our questions in the interaction with BITs." So Bits are dependent on IT some how?

So you are saying just from information matter can be produced from nothing...

and,

I am requesting you to go through my essay also. And I...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Levan replied on Jul. 12, 2013 @ 22:45 GMT
Dear S.N.P.

Information or bits are the virtual chickens which are always there (in nature). They are the topology - the map. Our today's view of them are the not erasable (no hidden) quantum informations. ITs are the eggs which emerge (become materialized) in the presence of energy. The environmental conditions decide which eggs will produce the next generation of chickens (evolution of topology) .... this is the all inclusive IT - the interaction of virtual bits (chickens) and materialized its (eggs).

I will go all the essays through, also yours

Thanks for your question

David

Bookmark and Share



Hoang cao Hai wrote on Jul. 5, 2013 @ 01:15 GMT
Dear David

Your analysis is good, but somewhat confusing : "We have to distinguish information and signal. Information is made from BITs, signal from ITs. Signals have limited speed of propagation, information is instantly present. "

Why Signals have limited speed of propagation, information is instantly present. " ? - In fact there seems to be no such.

And to change the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author David Levan wrote on Jul. 12, 2013 @ 23:23 GMT
Dear Hoang,

realy there seems to be no such instantly present information, but remind Aspect's measurement /EPR paradox/. Space-time quantum world seems to be a distorted mirror of nature (see the last year essay from G.M. D'Ariano).

Signal is a energetical/material version of information. But there are informations in nature free of energy, e.g. topology of momentum space vacuum (G. Volovik), measured near zero Kelvin. Quantum theory seems to be an information theory of space-time.

David

Bookmark and Share



Vladimir Rogozhin wrote on Jul. 13, 2013 @ 20:40 GMT
Hello David,

Excellent essay, good deep philosophical questions of broad and deep responses specifically on the theme of the contest. Good luck in the contest and best wishes, Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Vladimir Rogozhin replied on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 12:53 GMT
Hello David,

Sorry, forgot to write your essay rating - "happy nine" from 13.07. Please visit my forum.

Bedt regards,

Vladimir

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


George Kirakosyan wrote on Jul. 15, 2013 @ 08:01 GMT
Dear David,

Your essay is interesting and stated question is also very justified - What is ,,It -Bit,,? Of course, my dear, we are just obligate to define the meaning of subjects of examination before starting the battle! A lot of people just not ques to ask himself - what about we are talking actually. I don't want to continue more because I am quickly coming creasy with such simple misunderstands. I am very inclined to rate your essay as high for this, just it will be desirable for my to listening your brief impression/opinion on my work (my email there) ESSAY

Best Wishes,

George

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Levan replied on Jul. 15, 2013 @ 23:08 GMT
Hi George,

stop to believe is the answer - challenge. /More in the post to your essay.

The conformity is killing.

David

Bookmark and Share



George Kirakosyan wrote on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 04:37 GMT
Maybe you are right at all, and not on this case! Just need ask himself where we are now - than we can thinking on right behavior.

Regards,

George

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Peter Jackson wrote on Jul. 16, 2013 @ 14:51 GMT
David,

Very interesting essay and ideas. I found some parts a little confusing but I suspect that was only due to incomplete language familiarity. I found many parts very coherent and well considered, but other parts apparently less so. To first focus on areas of strong agreement I particularly pick out;

"The coherent quantum information escapes as a coherent domain"

" The natural blueprint is the momentum space topology, which is not static but dynamical and evolving as a result of influencing background information"

"Relativity is only local in region with not changing energy-momentum density."

"Inflation phase of the early universe was artificially created...", and... (we live in); "...a dynamical universe, where gravity is secondary to topology."

"Dark matter in galaxies and clusters of galaxies. Even our common sense is capable to accept that a spinning and twisting system is energetically more copious than the same system at rest."

On the EPR case, I analyse this in detail in my essay, consistent with the McHarris and Watson essays. Did you know that Alain Aspect found a consistent 'orbital asymmetry' in his results, leading him to discard the vast majority as he could find no theory to explain it? This was not referred in his first paper but was mentioned in his French language paper a year later. I've found that 'hidden' data massively important, and precluding the need for FTL communication. I hope you'll read my essay and give it the critical eye of one who sympathises with at least one model of FTL. This is the best falsification possible. See the extended explanation in the discussions.

Well done for your essay. I think your score should be rather higher and if I've understood your positions correctly will be happy to help it up. Best of luck, and look forward to your views on mine if you can find the time.

Peter

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Jul. 17, 2013 @ 19:06 GMT
Hello David,

Nice essay, but I disagree with your opinion on Olaf's blog that Bit from It is a road to hell. I describe a road in my essay. Take a look and rate if you think it can lead to heaven. Meanwhile...

As the contest in Wheeler's honor draws to a close, leaving for the moment considerations of rating and prize money, and knowing we cannot all agree on whether 'it' comes from 'bit' or otherwise or even what 'it' and 'bit' mean, and as we may not be able to read all essays, though we should try, I pose the following 4 simple questions and will rate you accordingly before July 31 when I will be revisiting your blog.

"If you wake up one morning and dip your hand in your pocket and 'detect' a million dollars, then on your way back from work, you dip your hand again and find that there is nothing there…

1) Have you 'elicited' an information in the latter case?

2) If you did not 'participate' by putting your 'detector' hand in your pocket, can you 'elicit' information?

3) If the information is provided by the presence of the crisp notes ('its') you found in your pocket, can the absence of the notes, being an 'immaterial source' convey information?

Finally, leaving for the moment what the terms mean and whether or not they can be discretely expressed in the way spin information is discretely expressed, e.g. by electrons

4) Can the existence/non-existence of an 'it' be a binary choice, representable by 0 and 1?"

Answers can be in binary form for brevity, i.e. YES = 1, NO = 0, e.g. 0-1-0-1.

Best regards,

Akinbo

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Levan replied on Jul. 17, 2013 @ 20:54 GMT
Hi Akinbo,

the level of dollars, electrons and Yes/No is not fundamental, simply because there is no conservation od information on this level (and you are faced with miracles every moment).

1, Binary is not natural, more natural is quantum quaternary

2, Information is present without the nees to be elicited, no detector is needed to create information, detector creates signal

3, Crisp notes is a material signal, the absence of is also a material signal

4, Existence/non-existence of a material IT is a binary choice.

Best regards,

David

Bookmark and Share



Sreenath B N wrote on Jul. 24, 2013 @ 07:57 GMT
Dear David,

I have down loaded your essay and soon post my comments on it. Meanwhile, please, go through my essay and post your comments.

Regards and good luck in the contest,

Sreenath BN.

http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/1827

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Manuel S Morales wrote on Jul. 25, 2013 @ 01:17 GMT
Hi David,

I found your essay truly original, imaginative, and insightful. Although you have a different approach to the emergence of something from nothing than I do, I found your essay inspiring and most worthy of merit.

Best of luck to you in the competition.

Regards,

Manuel

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Jul. 28, 2013 @ 15:58 GMT
Mr. Levan,

Your essay was certainly intriguing. I found that in some paragraphs, it did not really matter in which order the sentences were read, the level of literal mystification still prevailed.

I hope you do well in the contest,

Joe

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Author David Levan wrote on Jul. 29, 2013 @ 15:22 GMT
Mr. Fisher,

there are only two roots which I follow

A, Don't believe

B, Follow the observations

It's not my way to present any mystification. Follow the references in my essay. I am ready to extend them. Only what we measure is crucial. How to interpret the measurements is an other story. But don't forget the everyday unexplained observations !

If you think, that what I write is unbelievable, I agree, but this is how nature can act, without miracles. You can also read the essay from Mauro D'Ariano of this contest, to open insight, what I follow.

David

PS: I don't believe in miracles, distinctly I rate the community - not only here - is a community of believers ...

Bookmark and Share


Joe Fisher replied on Jul. 29, 2013 @ 15:42 GMT
David,

I wish to withdraw my previous comment for it was uncalled for and I do apologize to you for making it.

In my essay BITTERS, I emphasize the observable fact that everything in the real Universe is unique, once. Each real snowflake is unique, once, which means that each real molecule of each real snowflake must also be unique, once. It cannot simply be snowflakes; everything in the real Universe can only ever be unique, once.

This presents something of a scientific problem in that no measurement of anything unique, once, can be taken for it only happens once. No experiment to detect unique, once, can ever be devised.

Like a true scientist, you wrote an essay about belief. When judged in that regard, it is a fine essay.

I hope you do well in the competition,

Joe

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


john stephan selye wrote on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 01:48 GMT
Having read so many insightful essays, I am probably not the only one to find that my views have crystallized, and that I can now move forward with growing confidence. I cannot exactly say who in the course of the competition was most inspiring - probably it was the continuous back and forth between so many of us. In this case, we should all be grateful to each other.

If I may, I'd like to...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Sreenath B N wrote on Aug. 2, 2013 @ 15:27 GMT
Dear David,

You have written your essay in original style and accordingly treated the relationship between It and Bit. Your theme behind your article may be summarized in your own words as “The all-inclusive IT equals the web of BITs, and the mITs represent the unity of material physical ITs and massless virtual BITs in the presence of energy. We have to distinguish information and signal. Information is made from BITs, signal from ITs. Signals have limited speed of propagation, information is instantly present.” You have given importance to information and is according to you, “Information is primary, matter secondary. mITs are in the unity with the hidden BITs. One can think of BITs as of top level or most bottom level.”

Very well coordinated article. So it deserves excellent rating. Please, go through my essay and post your comments on it in my thread.

Best of luck,

Sreenath

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


eAmazigh M. HANNOU wrote on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 01:36 GMT
Dear David,

We are at the end of this essay contest.

In conclusion, at the question to know if Information is more fundamental than Matter, there is a good reason to answer that Matter is made of an amazing mixture of eInfo and eEnergy, at the same time.

Matter is thus eInfo made with eEnergy rather than answer it is made with eEnergy and eInfo ; because eInfo is eEnergy, and the one does not go without the other one.

eEnergy and eInfo are the two basic Principles of the eUniverse. Nothing can exist if it is not eEnergy, and any object is eInfo, and therefore eEnergy.

And consequently our eReality is eInfo made with eEnergy. And the final verdict is : eReality is virtual, and virtuality is our fundamental eReality.

Good luck to the winners,

And see you soon, with good news on this topic, and the Theory of Everything.

Amazigh H.

I rated your essay.

Please visit My essay.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Author David Levan replied on Aug. 6, 2013 @ 14:09 GMT
Hi Amazing H.

I don't believe, I don't believe in duality,

root of Everything is the Information-field,

secondary is the energy-field of Universe,

the third level is our material reality.

I have rated your essay last week.

Be lucky, David

Bookmark and Share


eAmazigh M. HANNOU replied on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 10:22 GMT
Hi David,

No contradiction between eDuality and information.

eDuality is information, 0 and 1. eDuality is at the basis of symmetry. eDuality is any object, any reality.

eDuality is quantum mecanics, relativity, sets theory, and so on...

Best wishes

Amazigh H.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Cristinel Stoica wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 07:43 GMT
Hi, votes are vanishing again.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Paul Borrill wrote on Aug. 7, 2013 @ 19:10 GMT
Dear David,

I have now finished reviewing all 180 essays for the contest and appreciate your contribution to this competition.

I have been thoroughly impressed at the breadth, depth and quality of the ideas represented in this contest. In true academic spirit, if you have not yet reviewed my essay, I invite you to do so and leave your comments.

You can find the latest version of my essay here:

http://fqxi.org/data/forum-attachments/Borrill-TimeOne-
V1.1a.pdf

(sorry if the fqxi web site splits this url up, I haven’t figured out a way to not make it do that).

May the best essays win!

Kind regards,

Paul Borrill

paul at borrill dot com

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.